I’m left wondering what their monetization strategy would be, what would be the catch since they are a for-profit company and as such has to make a profit if they want to keep developing the engine (a good development team alongside heavy R&D is not cheap).
Unless an engine is under a license like the MIT, BSD, Apache2, or GPL, one should always seek the fine print.
Ridiculous comment that Epic, Unity, etc are “scared of” the BGE - Check
BPR bringing up how much cooler the BGE could be if only X - Check
OK, with all that’s happened so far - I only need someone to tell the game industry to move away from FBX because “Freedom!” and an irrelevant video of some trivial “Wrecktified” feature to complete my BA Game Engine bingo card. 
It’s almost certainly no more on their radar than the Crystal Space engine it’s based on. Which is to say, zero.
Someone would have to actually make a game worth playing for them to ever even take notice.
Yes, available via the market place for free.
Not at all since forever. Documentation and tutorials are also still free.
For anyone having issues setting it up try: https://www.cryengine.com/tutorials/designer-series/launcher-install
The two videos after show how to start a project then integrate the Crysis 3 assets and SDK sample respectively.
I imagine more immediate and direct support is one avenue that would scale with $$ outlayed, as with any of the engines out there. Yep, always read the fine print.
Hope profitable ventures give back to Crytek, a pioneer in graphics to this day, and usability (first for WYSIWYG editing circa 2004).
Documentation is free but looking at it now very incomplete and outdated for the most part with only some parts updated to reflect the new engine. Will that change in the future? Who knows, crytek is not known for documenting the engine well to begin with and relegating support to behind a pay wall smells fishy to me.
I tried it, now assets can import easily. but for some reason camera jumping to origin(0,0,0) when ever i try to animate it with track view.
But amazon lumberyard engine is working ok for me
done by blender and lumberyard:eyebrowlift:
Let’s put it in Blender and then call all the games made with cryengine, that they are blendergames xD
This documentation: http://docs.cryengine.com/display/SDKDOC1/Home ?
Historically I’ve seen it updated with workflow and feature changes. They take and respond to feedback should you have a specific example of inaccurate or missing docs.
Never agreed with such complaints. As for pay walled support, I’m talking professional engine devs (potentially btw) taking time from their existing roles to personally assist, code, collaborate. That too, along with state of the art engines, should be free? Hold the updates, the SIGGRAPH papers, whatever games they’ve got in the pipe… paying bills?
Could it cause legal problems to put blender and cryengine together?It would be great to make a better visual programming language for it in blender.
That link you posted showcases the issue. The docs for the latest version are in another section and they are extremely basic and don’t go into any kind of detail about the engine ,including any references for their C# implementation for scripting. Clicking on the scripting link still points you to their old Lua and C++ page that hasn’t been updated since 2014. There is just a lot or missing and an unorganized information right now and that has been the case for quite some time.
The documentation they have now is written poorly and obtusely. I won’t even go into how slow the pics on their site loads. Feels like I’m back in 1995 using CompuServe or something.
Contrast this with Unreal’s, Unity’s or Godot’s documentation. Well laid out, flow from topic to topic, latest features documented almost immediately, documentation is kept up to date, loading example pics and snapshots are speedy and informative.
Lumberyard seems more reliable imo. I intend to try it when I get some free time. I also saw another vid called Pool and Path. Is that also with Lumberyard? Btw how are you finding the realtime GI and reflections in Lumberyard?
I am wondering whether Cryengine might pick up soon with this pay what you want but fact is a lot of ppl might be a little weary of this move because of how rigid they have been in the past. I am expecting them to release a tech demo soon showcasing Cryengine V features.
Lumberyard will probably release a tech demo soon but currently they are working with feedback from users. Lumberyard already has support for Blender and substance designer. Cryengine does not. Lumberyard also will be releasing updates every 4-6 weeks. That’s pretty impressive.
As for ue4, they need to start doing something about realtime GI and reflections. Ue4 rocks though.
Pool and path also done with same Blender and Lumberyard. about GI – just put an environment prob (in object tab - misc - environmentprob). resize it enough to cover your scene. and press generate cube map–you can adjust quality and resolution also.
done:) Most of the reflections are connected with environment prob in my files. need to put that map generated in material environment map slot. then just adjust the smoothness and specular as requirement.
sorry for my english.
Your english is okay,mate.
Cool to know. If you move an object around,does the GI update in realtime?
I can’t help wondering if Amazon are gonna change their payment plans if Lumberyard is no longer in beta. They are saying it’s free except for their aws services. I am sure it’s gonna stay that way though.
EDIT:
Just found out u can’t use Cryengine V for anything except games:
2.4. Restrictions on Use: Crytek reserves all rights not expressively granted in this Agreement. Without limitation, Licensee shall not:
distribute, sublicense or exploit in any other form:
[LIST]
the CryEngine (except for the Redistributables), e.g. as a stand-alone development engine;
the CryEngine Documentation;
the CryEngine Tools;
use the CryEngine for the development of any product other than Games, including without limitation:
military projects
gambling;
simulation (technical, scientific, other);
science;
architecture;
pornography;
Serious Games.
[/LIST]
https://www.cryengine.com/ce-terms
Seriously,ppl read the eula.U can’t use it to make archviz, animations, short films. Lumberyard on the other hand is free. I suspected Cryengine wasn’t completely free.
It was nothing but clicks via either the left pane or whatever page was up. That 2014 page is under Sandbox (the editor), and if not sent to the deprecated section, should still apply. Does it not? Try Technical Documentation > CRYENGINE API Reference > C++ or CE# API Reference > Click some buttons see what happens?
Sure some was, but missing perhaps because of the tiered access that was in effect until just now? Seems like a hierarchical layout to me.
Consider that the newly available documentation was only utilized internally and by licensees, who may have been slightly more fluent than every kid and their Steam account. It may be made even more digestible via their forums (same as your engine login), try searching, asking for help or offering feedback there.
Good grief. Maybe in the face of all these insurmountable odds the alternatives are the answer?
I’m pointing out issues with the documentation. I’m not sure why you feel the need to take it personally or like I’m attacking CryEngine. The engine is going to be looked at by a lot of indie developers. Bad documentation in that context will mean those kinds of developers will look elsewhere and for the most part have. The indie community mostly ignored previous efforts by CryTek to release the engine.
The fact is the documentation is not there. It’s not an insurmountable odd it’s a fact. If CryEngine wants to build a real thriving community around their product they need to address this. And yes my team and I are sticking with the alternative (Unreal) where support is freely given by the developers on their forums, there is a thriving community, and documentation was taken seriously.
I did click buttons maybe you didn’t. Had you read the documentation fully you would see how much of a mess it is. Telling me to click buttons and figure it out defeats the point of documentation. Do I need documentation to figure out the documentation? I’m not sure what you are getting at.
Even seasoned developers have complained about CryEngine’s documentation. Not sure why you are acting like it’s a non issue. Many developers have been turned away from the engine because of this. It’s why CryTek had to be bailed out by Amazon, they weren’t getting enough licensees to their engine (nor selling that many games).
Reads like FUD to me when I easily find the things you seemingly don’t.
licence terminologies 
for games, but not for serious games… not for science, not for architecture? doesn’t make any sense to me
I’m not too bothered about the old unpolished documentation though. It takes time to produce something decent.
They just made their engine very open. That’s why they are and will be facing several issues they underestimated or simply didn’t predict. It seems they are trying to reduce the support burden as much as possible by “only” allowing games. Architectural visualization and the other prohibited areas usually can be rather different from games regarding the requirements.
I assume that most of those restrictions will be removed in the future.
it’s the “games” and “serious games” distinction that puzzles me the most. by definition, a serious game is a game also, where do we draw the line between a game and a serious game?
it probably doesn’t have any real implication, though. it’s just funny to see them running around in circles and bushes and grey areas for apparently no reason.
It is not always possible to clearly separate games and serious games.
And as already mentioned, they seem to have an interest to strictly having a focus on games only. That might be a good reason, though there might be others.